Letter: It's politics, not straight talk

In response to Lewis Wanamaker (letter, Sept. 7): I have read this letter three times and I still do not see where Sen. Barack Obama degrades the Constitution.

Actually there is no provision in the Constitution that provides for the executive order Mr. Wanamaker seems fearful of, only something called executive power (Article II, Section I). Neither really matters, for it's Congress that makes the decisions (at least it's suppose to) and the executive branch carries them out (or doesn't).

Since the Constitution gives us free speech, what's wrong with saying that the United States unjustly invaded Iraq? Especially since that time even the president has admitted that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (only in countries like North Korea, India, Israel and Pakistan, who have them and have not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty).

Since one of them was part of the "axis of evil," why did we not invade that country? (Probably because we knew we could not, militarily, defeat them in six months.)

Many people supported going into Afghanistan after Sept. 11. If we had placed more troops there originally, we even might have found
Osama bin Laden
, really kicked the
Taliban
out and destroyed
al-Qaida
(as opposed to aiding this group we helped invent itself).

Wanamaker writes about "actions speak louder than words" (although it can cost more lives). To some degree, I agree. I was for
John McCain
in the 2000 primaries, but he was sabotaged by false allegations in the South Carolina primary.

What did the "straight talk express" do? First, he joined forces with the man (
George Bush
) whose election committee spread the false allegations, and then seven years later even hired some from that group to run his own campaign. That's not straight talk, that's politics.